The new International is rising up,
as logical as a law of nature,
with its leaders if they follow us,
without its leaders if they hesitate,
against its leaders if they oppose us.”1
Stormklockan, the organ of the Swedish
Young Social Democrats 1909-1917
The outset of the First World War was a massive defeat for the
international Labour Movement. Its leaders joined up with the
capitalists, the Second International dissolved, parliamentary
democracy was severely curtailed, and millions of young men were
plunged into a blood bath. Yet regardless of all these difficulties
the anti-war movement came to life again.
A new beginning
In March 1915, socialists from countries at war with each other
gathered for the first time since the collapse of the Second
International. Clara Zetkin, a leader of the German Social Democratic
Party, had organised several international women’s conferences for the
Second International. Now she convened a conference at Berne in
Switzerland. Twenty-nine women activists from Germany, England,
France, Italy, the Netherlands, Poland, and Russia met in secret in
Switzerland. The elected leadership of the Second International, the
International Socialist Bureau or ISB, was hostile, and the German and
French party leadership forbade its members to attend. The Conference
Manifesto was widely distributed. 200 000 copies circulated illegally
in Germany.2
A month later young socialists met. A conference was held, despite
the opposition of the official leadership of the Socialist Youth
International, of youth delegates from nine different national youth
organisations. The conference voted to re-establish the Socialist Youth
International and set up a secretariat in Zurich. The “Liebknecht fund”
was launched to pay for the work, and a quarterly magazine Jugend-Internationale was published. The Youth International organised the first international day of protest in October 1915.
The next important step, in September 1915, was a conference
convened in Zimmerwald, a small Swiss village. The initiative was taken
by the leadership of the Italian Socialist Party. At first they tried
to convince the ISB to organise it, but the ISB would not be budged. It
was attended by official representatives from parties and party
factions. Delegates from Britain and some from France were unable to
attend because their governments stopped them from leaving the country.
In contrast to the giant rallies that had taken place before the war,
only scattered remnants of the International attended the Swiss
meeting.
The conference adopted two policy statements. One was a manifesto
written by Leon Trotsky, urging the workers of Europe to end the truce
in the class struggle and oppose government war credits. The Manifesto
called for peace without any annexation of territory, based on
self-determination for all.
The Manifesto was adopted unanimously, but there was a group of
delegates who considered it insufficient. They called themselves the
Zimmerwald Left and consisted of Vladimir Lenin and Gregory Zinoviev
representing the Russian Social Democrats, Karl Radek representing the
Poles, Paul Winter the Latvians, and Ture Nerman and Zäta Höglund for
the youth organisations in Norway and Sweden. They issued a statement
that they voted for the Manifesto because they saw it as a “call to
struggle and because we want to march forward in this struggle arm in
arm with the other sections of the International”. However, they added
that they considered that the Manifesto should have contained a
condemnation of all the social democratic leaders who supported the
war. Nor did they think the Manifesto explained clearly enough the
methods that should be used to fight war.
Few people attended the Zimmerwald conference, and those who did
were not totally in agreement. Yet they managed to draw up a set of
fundamental guidelines for the continuation of the struggle, and
several of those present would in time play a key role in their
respective countries. The ideas that emerged from Zimmerwald provided
the basis for a mass struggle against the war, not least in Sweden,
Russia, and Germany.
The anti-war struggle in Sweden
In the years prior to the First World War, the Swedish monarchy,
right-wing parties and military had been urging for the country to
rearm. In 1910, the right-wing government initiated negotiations with
the German government regarding a Swedish-German military pact against
Russia.
This drive for rearmament came to be known as activism. The
campaign sought an ‘active’ foreign policy or, as it was phrased later,
“courageous backing of the German side”.3 Besides agitating in the
press and at meetings, the campaign consisted of fund-raising events to
help finance the building of armoured ships. It enjoyed the support of
King Gustav V and of his German-born queen, Victoria. Activism
culminated in a ‘peasant’s rally’ in Stockholm on 6 February 1914,
attended by 30 000 peasants and others from different parts of Sweden.
They demanded that Sweden’s defence be strengthened immediately, in
view of the tense world situation. The King appeared in the palace
courtyard to declare his support for the demonstrators.
The Swedish Labour Movement had learnt from the events of 1905, and
reacted swiftly. Two days later, the Stockholm branch of the Social
Democratic Party organised a workers’ rally in response to the
‘peasant’s rally’. Despite the cold grey weather, some 50 000 people
marched to the government offices to demand that military spending be
cut and to protest against the monarchy. The police identified the
Social Democratic mayor of the city as one of those who had cried “Long
live the republic!” For this, he was taken to court and fined 100
crowns. The sum was collected in 1 öre coins (one hundreth of a crown)
at meetings around the country. “Among the workers, there was a
fighting spirit and a belief in victory”, wrote Zäta Höglund,
describing the period immediately after the march. “The Social
Democrats launched a huge campaign against the rearmament propaganda
and the royal coup. During the Easter weekend alone, the Young Social
Democrats held 400 meetings to protest against militarism. The halls
were packed and discussion usually continued far into the night.”4
But as war approached, the leaders of the Labour Movement came under
increasing pressure to fall in behind the ‘nation’, i.e. the
bourgeoisie. On the day war broke out, Hjalmar Branting, leader of the
Social Democratic Party, addressed an election meeting. There, and in a
telegram he later dispatched to the rightist government then in power,
he declared that “in the face of war, the domestic social quarrels of
each and every nation, however severe they may be as a result of class
divisions, must for the moment be of secondary consideration.” Just
like fellow bureaucrats across the continent, he was offering a party
truce to the bourgeoisie. However, Branting could go no further than
that. The struggle of workers, and the strong and experienced
opposition in his party, again blocked the Swedish government’s
intention to go to war. So a compromise was made. There was a truce,
Branting remained party leader, and Sweden stayed neutral. This was the
origin of Swedish neutrality, a policy that all governments were forced
to pursue – at least officially – for the rest of the century.
However, the matter was not settled once and for all. The right-wing
parties continued to press for Swedish participation in the war, and
the Labour Movement continued to resist. Early in 1916, there were
rumours that a general mobilisation was planned. In response, the
Miners’ Union discussed going on strike and refusing the call-up. There
were calls within the Labour Movement for the Social Democrats to
convene an extra congress to discuss what action to take. The Young
Social Democrats wrote to the party executive requesting this. After
several months without a reply, they tired of waiting and called a
workers’ peace congress themselves. They invited all organisations that
supported workers’ action against warmongers to attend.
At about the same time, an article published in Stormklockan, the
paper of the Young Socialists, caused a major stir. Erik Hedén, one of
the most respected Social Democratic journalists of the day, wrote
under the heading “Time for a general strike. We either act now – or go
to war!”5
The invitation to the workers’ peace congress and the article in Stormklockan drew
criticism from the Social Democratic party executive. They threatened
the organisers with expulsion from the party. A members’ meeting of the
Stockholm branch was held to discuss the situation, attended by 600
people. On one side stood Branting and on the other Erik Hedén and
Zeth Höglund. Hedén won a slight majority for his proposal that the
meeting issue a statement regretting that the party executive had
failed to call a peace congress and expressing sympathy for the Young
Social Democrats’ initiative in doing so. The meeting also urged the
party executive and the national secretariat to convene an extra
congress without further ado.
The workers’ peace conference organised by the Young Social
Democrats was held in Stockholm in March 1916. It was well attended,
not only by its own supporters but also by local party branches, trade
unions and temperance lodges. The 265 delegates represented
organisations with a total of 40 000 members. A manifesto was adopted
calling on the Labour Movement to respond to the plans for war with its
own plans for mass extra-parliamentary actions. Two days after the
congress ended, charges of treason were brought against Höglund, Hedén
and Ivan Oljelund. The inclusion of Oljelund in these proceedings was
remarkable as he had been the only delegate at the congress to oppose a
general strike!
The trial was a farce. But lack of evidence did not prevent the
court from sentencing the accused to imprisonment and the forfeiture of
their civil rights. Once again, those who had fought for peace were
forced to go to jail for their views. Zeth Höglund faced not only three
years’ imprisonment, but loss of his seat in Parliament. Protests
poured in from at home and abroad. On appeal, Hedén was found not
guilty, while Höglund’s and Oljelund’s prison sentences were reduced to
12 months and eight months respectively. While Höglund was in jail,
Branting took the opportunity of sacking him as a full-time official
for the party.
Russia: revolution stops war
In Russia, the world war immediately sparked off protests. In many
parts of Russia, workers went on strike on mobilisation day. Both the
Bolshevik and Menshevik Social Democratic6 deputies voted in the Duma
(Russian parliament) against funding the war effort. The Bolsheviks
also waged a campaign in factories and elsewhere, which led to the
entire Bolshevik parliamentary group being deported to Siberia.
Nonetheless, the Bolsheviks continued to fight against the war, and
they strove to bring down the government. They got widespread support.
The heavy cost of the war was felt throughout Russian society. As
the war progressed, food became increasingly scarce. In early 1917,
protests grew in strength and a number of strikes broke out. On March
8 (February 28 under the old Russian calendar), the women of Petrograd
took to the streets, demanding bread and peace. Women working at the
city’s textile factories went on strike, carrying other groups of
workers with them. Within a few days, the movement had led to a general
strike.
On March 11, the Tsar ordered the military to open fire on
demonstrators and 40 people were killed. The same evening, one of the
city’s military garrisons mutinied in protest at the decision to attack
the workers. The following morning, the mutiny spread throughout the
regiment. When other regiments were brought in to quell the uprising,
they joined the mutineers.
As in the revolutionary period of 1905, Soviets (workers’ councils)
were set up. The Soviets were both local and regional in character.
Workers, soldiers, and peasants elected representatives to them. The
movement spread across the country and the Tsar had no option but to
resign. This became known as the February Revolution.
Before abdicating, the Tsar appointed Prince Lvov to head the
government, the Council of Ministers. He was soon replaced by Alexander
Kerensky. Neither was willing to end the war. Instead, a major
offensive was launched in the summer of 1917. This triggered
spontaneous uprisings against the government in Petrograd and Moscow,
but as the revolts were confined to the cities, the government was able
to suppress them. After that defeat, the movement lost impetus for a
while. The power of the Soviets was weakened and the Bolshevik Party,
which had been legalised at the time of the February revolution, was
once against outlawed.
However, the movement soon regained strength. Peasants began to
seize the property of landowners. Faith in the unelected provisional
government diminished. Many began to place greater trust in the
governing bodies they themselves built up. In August, there were 600
Soviets in the country, representing 23 million voters.7 By October
there were 900 Soviets.8
Many regiments declared that they would no longer take orders from
the government but would answer only to the Soviets. In practice, this
meant that the revolution had been successfully completed as power now
lay with the elected Soviets. When the Second Pan-Russian Congress of
the Soviets was held on 5 November,9 the Bolsheviks were in a majority.
Of the 650 delegates attending the congress, 390 supported the
‘Bolsheviki’.10
The storming and occupation of the Winter Palace (commonly referred
to as the October Revolution) on the night from 6 to 7 November was not
much of a storming at all. There was hardly any opposition.
More people died during the making of Eisenstein’s classic film about the revolution, October,
than in the actual revolution. The fall of the Winter Palace merely
swept away one of the vestiges of power of the old regime. When this
was announced at the Second Congress, a decree was adopted transferring
all power to the Soviets of Workers’, Soldiers’ and Peasants’ Deputies.
After the October Revolution, the socialist government immediately
began honouring its promises. It was well aware that attempts would be
made to bring down the new regime, and believed that if peasants were
given their land, workers were given control of their factories,
oppressed nationalities were given self-determination, and everybody
peace, the revolution would be better equipped to stave off
counter-revolutionary attacks.
On November 28 1917, the Bolshevik-led government negotiated a truce
along the entire Eastern Front, and in early December peace talks with
Germany began in Brest-Litovsk. The main opposition parties, the
Mensheviks and the Social Revolutionaries, argued strongly in favour of
continuing the war. They justified this by referring to Russia’s
obligations towards her old allies on the Western Front (Britain,
France and others), and patriotism: Germany and the other Central
Powers were occupying large areas of western Russia, Ukraine, Belarus
and the Baltic States.
Prior to the October Revolution, the Bolsheviks had unanimously
agreed that if the working class took control of Russia, all the
warring parties were to be offered a just peace without any annexation
of territory or payment of war damages. Should the imperialist powers
refuse to accept this, the Bolsheviks would defend the socialist state
while at the same time advocating and supporting revolt against the
imperialist powers. They argued that this line would most benefit the
struggle for international socialism.
Most of the Bolshevik leaders continued to pursue this line after
the October Revolution. However, when Germany refused to agree to a
just peace, Lenin realised that the Russian army was no longer in a
condition to continue the war. Soldiers, who were often peasants,
hurried home to make sure they would not be left out when the Church’s
and the landowners’ property was parcelled out. The land-reform decree
had hastened the disintegration of the army.
As Lenin saw it, a separate peace with the German generals, even if
it were achieved on extremely unfavourable terms, would hasten the
socialist revolution in Germany and the rest of Europe. In particular,
it would ensure that a valuable example was set: in the East, a
socialist Soviet state in peace, and in the West, two imperialist blocs
locked in bloody war.
There was, of course, a risk that an end to hostilities on the
Eastern Front would make it easier for Germany to wage war on the
Western Front, thus encouraging chauvinism in Germany. Stalin and
Zinoviev, who supported Lenin’s call for an immediate peace, argued
that the Russian revolution was worth saving even if such a move
delayed the German revolution. Lenin was forced to dissociate himself
openly and categorically from this line of thinking. He retorted that
the German revolution was more important than the Russian, as a
revolution in an advanced capitalist state would be of much greater
benefit to the working class of the world.11
Trotsky took a position midway between Lenin and those that wanted
to wage a revolutionary war. His position became known as “neither war
nor peace”. He argued that the Russian soldiers should simply lay down
their arms and leave the front; without the Soviet government signing a
humiliating peace agreement. This would show the workers of the world
that Russia had peaceful intentions and was unwilling to sign an unjust
pact. In fact, this policy was adopted by the Bolsheviks for a brief
period. But when the German troops continued to advance eastwards
despite the refusal of the Russian troops to fight, Trotsky sided with
Lenin. The international Labour Movement, he thought, would understand
that the Russian government had no alternative.
At a meeting of the Bolsheviks’ party executive, Lenin’s line was
approved by the narrowest of margins. On 3 March, the government signed
an agreement with Germany and the Central Powers on less favourable
terms than those originally offered by the Germans. Russia was to pay
war damages of 300 million gold roubles and was also to concede an area
of land equivalent to a quarter of its pre-war territory. Southern
Russia and Ukraine, both of which had also been drawn into the
revolution and had active workers’ councils, were taken over by
Germany.12
The Russian Bolsheviks showed that the congress decision of the
International could be followed. They carried out a socialist
revolution and they brought the war to an end. However, the programme
of the International was a programme for the international Labour
Movement as a whole. The Bolsheviks alone could only partially
implement it. Although they made peace, they were unable to push
through the just peace they wanted. For that they needed the help of
the other leaders of the Second International.
German resistance to the war
In Germany, resistance to the war was organised by left Social
Democrats led by Rosa Luxemburg, Karl Liebknecht, Clara Zetkin and
Franz Mehring. At first, they were isolated and under severe pressure.
When the first vote for war credits was to be taken in the German
Parliament, Liebknecht opposed it at a meeting of the party’s
parliamentary group, but bowed to the party whip and voted in favour on
4 August, 1914. Subsequently, having been criticised by a group of
industrial workers with leading positions in the Stuttgart party
organisation he acknowledged that he had been “deeply shaken” and that
“you are quite right in criticising me” for voting for credits. When
the German government again asked the Reichstag for more money to
finance the war effort, Karl Liebknecht was the only MP to vote
against.13 In his speech to the Reichstag, he called for a swift peace
without further territorial conquest.
In the spring of 1915, the German Left started a new newspaper, Die Internationale,
in which Rosa Luxemburg wrote an editorial calling for the
reconstruction of the International. The government immediately banned
the newspaper, and charges of treason were brought against Luxemburg,
Zetkin and Mehring. Rosa Luxemburg was already serving a prison
sentence at the time, having been convicted before the war for
inciting people to refuse the call-up. In December 1915, a score of
Social Democratic MP’s voted against further war credits.
In January 1916, the supporters of Die Internationale founded
a left faction in the German Social Democratic Party – the Spartacus
League. On Mayday the Spartacists headed a demonstration of 10 000 in
Berlin. Karl Liebknecht spoke on the theme ‘Down with the war. Down
with the Government’. He was immediately arrested and sentenced to two
and a half years in prison. Widespread protests followed. In Berlin, 55
000 workers from the city’s ammunition factories came out on strike. In
other places, too, strikes and demonstrations were organised. Thousands
of workers were imprisoned or sent off to war, or both. Consequently,
socialist propaganda reached the soldiers at the front as well.14
As the anti-war movement spread, the chauvinist leadership of the
German Social Democratic Party, SPD, felt more and more threatened. So
it expelled everybody who voiced any opposition. In April 1917 those
expelled formed the Independent Social Democratic Party (Unabhängige Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands,
or USPD). Even old Social Democratic leaders such as Eduard Bernstein
and Karl Kautsky, who had become more critical of the war as popular
support for it faded, joined the USPD. Rosa Luxemburg’s and Karl
Liebknecht’s Spartacists operated as an independent revolutionary group
within the USPD.
The leadership of the old SPD – a party that while diminishing in
size was still larger than the USPD – was led by careerists such as
Friedrich Ebert and Philip Scheidemann. Ebert was a monarchist and
“detested the revolution like the plague”. In his appeals to party
officials he urged them to show “loyalty to the fatherland”. 15
The German war machine had been in steady decline since the United
States entered the war. It was also becoming increasingly difficult to
maintain supply lines to both fronts. In July 1917, a majority in the
German Reichstag called for an unconditional peace. The government
manoeuvred the resolution off the agenda and the war continued. The
Bolshevik Revolution in November 1917 effectively led to the
withdrawal of Russia from the War, but the defeat of Germany on the
Western Front remained a certainty. By 1918, German troops were forced
to retreat in large numbers, and the General Staff also called for
peace negotiations. Kaiser Wilhelm’s Chancellor still refused.
Mutiny and uprising
A wave of unrest swept the country. At the end of October, sailors
in Kiel mutinied when their ship was ordered out on a suicide mission.
The sailors disarmed their officers and returned to port, where 580 of
them were jailed. The response was immediate: 40 000 sailors and dock
workers protested and a general strike developed. Soon, a council of
workers and soldiers was in control of the entire city.16
From Kiel, the uprising spread to Hamburg, Lübeck, Munich and many
more cities. As in Russia in 1905 and 1917, democratic councils of
workers and soldiers emerged in the course of the struggle. On 7
November 1918, the ‘Council of Workers, Soldiers and Peasants’ in
Munich announced that it had taken control. They appealed to the
citizens of Munich: “We ask all of you to help, so that the inevitable
transition may be effected quickly, easily and peacefully. In this age
of meaningless rampant murder, we abhor all bloodshed. Every human life
should be sacred. Stay calm and help us build up the new world.
Socialist fratricide will no more be seen in Bavaria. The working
masses will be united once again on the revolutionary base now
established. Long live the Bavarian Republic! Long live peace! Long
live the creative work of all people!”17 On 9 November, the revolt
reached the capital, Berlin. The Chancellor of the Reich announced his
resignation and the abdication of the Kaiser. The Kaiser fled the
country. Two days later Germany signed an armistice. Again, just like
in Russia and in Sweden, it was the working class that stopped the
warmongers.
However, unlike in Russia, the revolution was not carried through to
its conclusion. For another four years revolution and
counter-revolution swayed back and forth. Rosa Luxemburg and Karl
Liebknecht were arrested by Freikorps officers and
murdered.18 Many years later it emerged that Scheidemann, via the
SPD’s own secret police, ‘Section 14’, had put a bounty of 100 000
marks on their heads.19 The leaders that replaced them were not up to
the task of leading the revolution to victory. The failure of the
German Revolution meant that the road to another World War was open.
___________________________________________________________________________
1 Zeth Höglund: Från Branting till Lenin, 1953
2 Documents 1907 -1916: Lenin’s Struggle for a Revolutionary International
3 Knut Bäckström: Arbetarrörelsen i Sverige, del 2, 1971
4 Zeth Höglund: Från Branting till Lenin, 1953
5 Ibid.
6 Since 1903, the Russian Social Democratic Party had been split into two factions – the
Bolsheviks (the word means majority) and the Mensheviks (minority).
In 1912, they split permanently into two parties, both of which called
themselves social democratic. As all social democratic parties were
forbidden by the Czar, they appeared in the Duma under other names.
7 Leon Trotsky: The History of the Russian Revolution, 1988
8 Charles Bettelheim: Class Struggles in the USSR, 1976.
9 23 October under the old Russian calendar
10 In Bolshevism, Alan Woods give an exact breakdown of who supported the forming of
a Bolshevik government. 300 belonged to the Bolshevik Party. The
remaining 90 either belonged to the left-wing of either the
Social-Revolutionaries or the Mensheviks.
11 Alan Woods and Ted Grant: Lenin and Trotsky: What They Really Stood For, 2000
12 Isaac Deutscher: The Prophet Armed, 1973
13 Documents: 1907-1916: Lenin’s Struggle for a Revolutionary International
14 Introduction by Bo Gustafsson to the 1971 Swedish edition of Rosa Luxemburg’s book,
The Crisis of Social Democracy
15 ibid
16 Rob Sewell: Germany: 1918-1923, from Revolution to Counter-Revolution, 1988
17 1918-19. Ein Lesebuch, 1979
18 Under the protection and command of the social democratic minister Noske, private
armies were set up, as well as special legions of unemployed officers and soldiers – the Freikorps – to crush the revolution.
19 Paul Frölich: Rosa Luxemburg, 1939
